Clayton George Wickham - final thesis

229
implications for the way mainstream American film form has evolved over the last
thirty-plus years. Whether or not aesthetic progressiveness can be considered
indicative of sociopolitical progressiveness (a dubious claim, to be sure), it still
warns of the dangers of dismissing certain film texts contrary to one's ideological
positioning at the risk of understanding why films have become what they are.
This argument, in turn, responds to the accusation from theorists that formalists, in
their focus on microcosmic analysis, miss understanding the broader scope and
implications of a film. While the formalist largely does not seek “meaning” outside
of narrative information, there are broader trends to observe. Historical poetics looks
at developing trends over a large period of time. There is a “big picture”, to be seen,
but formalists see a different image. Looking at the aforementioned Barry Salt
article, he looks at smaller elements – i.e. average shot length – to understand how
films communicate, and challenge viewers to understand, narrative information. I
have consistently attempted, through this thesis, to relate the elements of film form
to the communication of narrative information, specifically through the application
of perspective. This also counters the argument that formalists only view artworks
as processes of systems and mechanics. Formalists use these processes to explain
how artworks communicate ideas, emotions, people, and objects that are familiar;
this is what Aristotle refers to when he discusses “representation”. Formalists
largely refrain from extending the interpretation of representative elements into
broader ideological trends and “meaning”, which threatens to undercut the precision
of the analyses and conclusions discussed earlier. These are the building blocks
upon which interpretive criticism, should one opt to purse it, be founded. This is
what Berliner points to when he says that theory threatens to “foul up aesthetic
analysis.”